[cfe-commits] r160265 - in /cfe/trunk: include/clang/Tooling/CommandLineClangTool.h lib/Tooling/CMakeLists.txt lib/Tooling/CommandLineClangTool.cpp test/CMakeLists.txt test/Tooling/clang-ast-dump.cpp tools/CMakeLists.txt tools/Makefile tools/clan

[Douglas Gregor]

On Jul 26, 2012, at 12:52 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>>> High-level design of the new feature:
>>> Are we sure that "substring of the node" is the desired interface? Why
>>> not regexp? (heck, I'd love a dynamic matcher expression :P).
>> 
>> Substring is quite useful, obvious and easy to implement. Regexps are
>> better, but this could be in one of the next iterations. Dynamic matcher
>> expressions would be great except that this would greatly increase skills
>> threshold required to use this tool ;)
> 
> Yea, I was not serious about the matcher expressions. And, in the case
> of an extra tool, I'd have been fine with this. For Clang itself, I'm
> less sure that we're as happy to go and change stuff around.
> 
> Doug? Any comment on how happy we are with having a command line
> interface we know we'll want to change later?

I think it's fine to revise the command-line interface over time. This is a debugging/exploration option after all, not something that users should depend on as part of their tools.

>>> -ASTConsumer *CreateASTPrinter(raw_ostream *OS);
>>> +ASTConsumer *CreateASTPrinter(raw_ostream *OS, const std::string
>>> &FilterString);
>>> 
>>> Any reasons not to use StringRef?
>> 
>> The reason is that performance issues are not going to appear in this code,
>> which is invoked once per program execution.
> 
> My impression is that Clang has a "use StringRef unless you have a
> good reason not to". With that in place, not using StringRef makes
> readers of the code stop and think why you did it.

Yes, we prefer StringRef wherever it can be used. 

	- Doug